[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] binary firmware and modules
On Mon, 2006-04-17 at 10:22 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 11:54:22AM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Am Samstag, 15. April 2006 10:10 schrieb Jon Masters:
> > > The attached patch introduces MODULE_FIRMWARE as one way of advertising
> > Strictly speaking, what is the connection with modules? Statically
> The same as MODULE_AUTHOR, MODULE_LICENSE, etc. The divide is more
> logical than physical.
> > compiled drivers need their firmware, too. Secondly, do all drivers
> > know at compile time which firmware they'll need?
> They have to know what they will request, do they not?

in order to not fall in the naming-policy trap: do we need a translation
layer here? eg the module asks for firmware-<modulename>
and userspace then somehow maps that to a full filename via a lookup

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-04-17 16:32    [W:0.301 / U:0.500 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site